Context, but not proficiency, moderates the effects of metaphor framing: A case study in India

Paul Thibodeau, Oberlin College

Daye Lee, Oberlin College

Stephen Flusberg, Purchase College

Abstract

Metaphors suffuse language and affect how people think. A
meta-analysis of metaphor framing studies conducted between 1983 and 2000
concluded that metaphors are about 6% more persuasive than literal language
(Sopory & Dillard, 2002). However, each of these studies was conducted in English
with samples drawn from populations of native English speakers. Here, we test
whether and how language proficiency moderates the influence of metaphor frames.
Sampling from a population of non-native, but generally proficient, English
speakers from India, we found that metaphor frames systematically affected people
who reported using English primarily in informal contexts (i.e., among friends
and family and through the media) but not for people who reported using English
primarily in formal contexts (i.e., for school or work). We discuss implications
of this finding for countries like the US, where English is increasingly a
non-native language for its residents, and for theories of language
processing.